Sauk Village, Ill. (ECWd) –
We first wrote about this in our article entitled “Sauk Village Mayor: “You Can’t Say Their Names“” back in November of 2025, after a village meeting where the mayor attempted to shut down Ms. Francine Anderson, a public commenter, for saying the names of village trustees during her public comment time.
We knew the mayor violated the Open Meetings Act and the public’s right to speak when we saw the video.
On January 21, 2026, the Illinois Attorney General’s Public Access Counselor published its first binding opinion of the year, and it confirms Sauk Village Mayor violated the Open Meetings Act during the November 4, 2025, meeting of the village trustees.
From the Binding Opinion:
- For the reasons discussed below, this office concludes that the Village of Sauk Village (Village) Board of Trustees (Board) violated OMA by
improperly limiting and interfering with Ms. Francine Anderson’s opportunity to address public officials during the Board’s November 4, 2025, Committee of the Whole meeting - The Board has not established and recorded a rule that prohibits speakers from addressing individual trustees by name. Even if it had, public comment rules must tend to accommodate, rather than unreasonably restrict, the right to address public officials. A rule that prohibits speakers from stating the names of trustees to which they direct comments would be incompatible with that standard and the language of section 2.06(g) of OMA that guarantees members of the public “an opportunity to address public officials[.]”
- Ms. Anderson did not disrupt the meeting by stating the names of trustees. Therefore, the interruption and interference with Ms. Anderson’s public comment was not a valid exercise of the Board’s inherent authority to run an orderly meeting.
- Accordingly, the Attorney General concludes that the Board violated section 2.06(g) of OMA by impermissibly restricting Ms. Anderson from addressing public officials during the Board’s November 4, 2025, Committee of the Whole meeting.
This was a complete embarrassment of the mayor and should be used as an example at all Open Meetings Act training classes as what not to do while in public office.
Binding Opinion 26-001 Sauk Village OMA_Redacted
4 Responses
I’ve attended meetings. The length of the meetings every Tuesday, that gets nothing accomplished, that last after 10pm and they make up rules as they go along every week that benefits no one, not even them on this committee. On this committee they all need to be replaced because nothing gets resolved, nothing changes for the better, time is wasted and most importantly they don’t qualify for the positions that they are in. They have no experience in the positions they were voted/put in. Ms. Francine Anderson is more educated and knows the rules and can do all their jobs by herself really offends them because they know when she stands up to ask a question they don’t know the answers and can’t fix any problems because they’re the problem first and foremost. Anybody that stands up to ask a question they talk over them, don’t listen to the questions or what the person has to say. So they will interrupt the person talking, they are very disrespectful, rude, and talk amongst each other at the table, but want the utmost respect when it’s their time to speak. So because they don’t know how to fix or resolve a problem, unfortunately this will continue to happen.
A binding opinion from the Illinois Attorney General’s public access counselors is quite rare. I recall hearing that they issue one for every 400 cases where they are asked to write their opinion. Is this the first binding opinion their office has issued since the fall of 2024 when they told Tiffany Henyard she must move Village of Dolton board of trustees meetings to a venue large enough to seat everyone?
Did the illinois AG cite the US Constitution and the Illinois Constitution in the opinion?
If not, why not?
They mention the U.S. constitution towards the bottom of page 7 and again on page 8.